View Single Post
Old 28-04-2012, 09:45 AM   #48
mpe_solution
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 158
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jon galt View Post
Ok so with out interest on loans, how does a bank make profit and pay its costs to function or even pay its staff? What incentive does any one have to lown moneyif the borrower pays exactly what they borrow? Unless there are hidden costs in this system, shuch as fees for taking the loan ect, which as AA explaines has a similar effect to interest allthough more hidden.
Then in the event that not every one does or can repay their loans ie job loss, who covers the banks losses?
THE PURPORTED QUESTION OF WHO SHOULD ISSUE THE CURRENCY

In order to represent the related obligation, currency comes into circulation as a debt. In order to duly represent the wealth, its trade, and its consumption, in mathematically perfected economy™ the debt is not subject to interest, the related obligation is not multiplied by unearned taking, and the unmultiplied obligation is paid at the rate of consumption of the related asset.

Regardless of whoever issues the currency, the real debt is to the producer of the wealth, who accepts the currency as a token of the resultant obligation.

Ordinarily then, a debtor would issue a note (promise to pay) to the possessor/producer of wealth, who is the real creditor.

The natural creditor is not loaning the debtor money, for none exists for the transaction or the debtor would not have to issue a note. Under these natural conditions then, the debtor is the natural issuer of money.

Not only are the people the natural issuers of money then; it is necessary to issue just this money at this juncture of the distribution of new production, or we suffer deficient circulation to sustain commerce (deflation).

Moreover then, without a further devised monetary system, no one even could reasonably issue promises to pay (money), but debtors.

WHY ACCEPT THE DEBT WITHOUT INTEREST?

So if *we* took these debts with interest, then should we need alike to issue or accept credit, our taking and paying would cancel each other's, and there wouldn't even be any ultimate point of this.

Furthermore, especially if different rates of interest might be presumed, we would involve ourselves in much effort and even strife, determining a just rate of interest which still would inevitably cancel in the paying and taking of just interest.

But any preoccupation with interest would absolutely be for nought if we could eliminate potential loss to every creditor, that we cannot even say risk exists, ostensibly to justify interest.

How would we do that?

Even presently in fact, government already attempts to ensure that creditors are delivered on debts, even as the very interest of the imposed monetary system introduces an entirely artificial risk, and multiplies that artificial risk until fulfillment of the perpetually multiplying obligations is inevitably impossible.

So the structure and even the intent already exist, except that the interest of the purported monetary system ultimately makes the success of the system impossible.

But in mathematically perfected economy™ (alone), the remaining value of the related property *always* makes it possible to recoup the remainder of the entire remaining obligation in the form of the very property itself.

So mathematically perfected economy™ imposes no risk or stress on the present infrastructures, which can be extended little to represent their further interest of eradicating the consequences of usury.

WHO WOULD LOAN MONEY IF IT WERE NOT SUBJECT TO INTEREST?

No one needs to loan money at interest under mathematically perfected economy™ then, because all necessary supplies of it can be jointly issued and even certified by the natural issuers of the currency — the very people.

mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
mpe_solution is offline   Reply With Quote